Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 November 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 25 November 27 >

November 26

[edit]

Mayors in Flevoland

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Mayors in Flevoland. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 11:09, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging:
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, just one or two articles in each of these categories and they are not part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:15, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Former motorcycle manufacturers of France

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. MER-C 16:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, aligning with sibling categories in Category:Defunct motorcycle manufacturers. It was opposed for speedy renaming because some manufacturers in this category might still exist today and changes business, so that "defunct" would not apply, but apparently none of these manufacturers factually is still existing. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:02, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
copy of CFDS discussion
@Hugo999, UnitedStatesian, and Armbrust: pinging contributors to CFDS discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:1470 establishments in Slovakia

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete; re-categorize article as discussed. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:40, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Did Slovakia, or even the word Slovakia, exist in 1470? As per Slovakia, The first written mention of name Slovakia is in 1586. Gjs238 (talk) 17:29, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Against. Slovakia does exist now, and the foundation mentioned in the relevant article was located in what are the present geographical boundaries of Slovakia, as is its successor now on the same site. It is a 1470 foundation and it is in Slovakia, and therefore conforms exactly to the definition in the category. If (for example) the area in 1470 was in the Kingdom of Hungary (which it may have been, haven't checked yet), it would be possible to categorize it also as "1470 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary". But it would not be correct to remove the present categorization. One category represents "in" as geographical location; the other as "in" political geohistory.--Smerus (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per consensus established at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 20#Category:1978 in Zimbabwe: we try to avoid anachronistic categories wherever possible. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:58, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, exactly! It goes into whichever country it was part of for that year. And the article will remain in 5 other Slovakian categories so readers interested in that topic can still find it. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:20, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Arkady and Boris Strugatsky

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete/merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:38, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Both fail WP:OCEPON. There is nothing in the second category besides the eponymous article and the novels category, in which main article Noon Universe can very well be located. Place Clichy (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:João Guimarães Rosa

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:38, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:OCEPON. Place Clichy (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Jorge Amado

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:OCEPON. Place Clichy (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:José de Alencar

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:OCEPON. Place Clichy (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Clarice Lispector

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:OCEPON. The only content besides the works category is Category:Translators of Clarice Lispector, which could just as well be located in the child category. After all, what did they translate but her works? Place Clichy (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Machado de Assis

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. MER-C 16:31, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:OCEPON. The only content besides the eponymous article is Category:Novels by Machado de Assis, Template:Works by Machado de Assis, a novella, a short story and Prêmio Machado de Assis, an article about an award named after him. Only the latter would not fit in a works category, but per WP:SHAREDNAME it is not necessary to parent an award to a category about its namesake. Place Clichy (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Timelines of fictional events

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. The sole article Timeline of Star Trek has been moved to Category:Wikipedia timelines. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is a WP:SMALLCAT that can never be populated beyond a few articles. There is currently only one article in this category, and many of the articles that once populated this category have been long since deleted, from bygone era when Wikipedia standards were much lower. Recommend deletion as the best alternative as these have been consistently deleted as violations of WP:OR (see collapsed comment below). Shooterwalker (talk) 16:05, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Note: I remember most of these were deleted more than ten years ago as a purge of original research lists. I found this 2012 AFD discussion where I compiled a list of AFDs that were relevant at the time. I decided to organize it and document it here for reference purposes. Nearly every fictional timeline has been deleted with a consensus at AFD (except for four, which were closed as redirect). Shooterwalker (talk) 16:58, 26 November 2020 (UTC) [reply]

List of deleted timelines of fictional events
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fictional victims human rights abuses

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. – Fayenatic London 11:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is mostly ORish, since "human rights" does not exist as a category in many (perhaps most) fictional works. I don't see the benefit for it to exist as a separate category from fictional victims. (t · c) buidhe 10:07, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch. Rename if Kept - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:05, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fictional victims of genocide

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. – Fayenatic London 09:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Similar to Fictional genocide perpetrators, this appears to a pure WP:OR category. I checked several of the articles at random and none of them mentioned "genocide". (edit: I made sure that the child cat, Category:Fictional Holocaust survivors, was upmerged as appropriate. (t · c) buidhe 09:51, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Viewtiful Joe (series)

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. MER-C 16:31, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To reflect the title of the main page of this category. According to WP:NCVGDAB, Viewtiful Joe was moved to Viewtiful Joe (video game) and Viewtiful Joe (series) was then moved to Viewtiful Joe. BMSPD (talk) 09:41, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fictional genocide perpetrators

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. – Fayenatic London 09:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be an WP:OR category. I checked several random articles in the category, Sarah Kerrigan, Phlox (Star Trek), Cult of Skaro, Darkspawn, and Vegeta. Of these only one of the articles (Vegeta) mentioned "genocide" in the text, and I removed it because it failed verification in the cited source.[2] (t · c) buidhe 09:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Cultural icon

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Badly named category (it should be pluralized "icons" if it's to exist at all) of questionable utility. Apart from the head article cultural icon itself, the contents here comprise three awards that have the word "icon" in their names, two similar articles about the concept of iconicity in narrower cultural domains, two redirects that have the word icon in their titles but lead to target articles that aren't really about that and one biography of an individual person. In other words, it's a weird mixture of several overcategorization errors rather than a useful or defining category. And even if it were to be kept, it would still have to be renamed to "Cultural icons" anyway, since categories like this are named in the plural rather than the singular. Bearcat (talk) 07:11, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:LGBT icon

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete, but merge the articles "FOO as a gay icon" to Category:LGBT culture. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Badly named category (it should be pluralized "icons" if it's to exist at all) of questionable utility. We've deleted "Gay icons" categories several times in the past (see in particular Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 April 27#Category:Gay icons to Category:LGBT icons, where it got deleted precisely on a failed proposal to rename it to this, but also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 January 24#Category:Gay icons, which ended with salting), but expanding "gay" to "LGBT" doesn't resolve the reasons why it was deleted in the first place since exclusion of L, B and T wasn't the problem with it.
Other than the head article gay icon itself, the only real contents here are a couple of "[Specific Celebrity] as gay icon" essays -- everything else is just a redirect, either "lesbian/LGBT icon" pointing back to the head article, or weird isolated cases where "[Specific Celebrity] as gay icon" exists as a redirect to the specific celebrity's BLP rather than a standalone article. (And even the actual standalone articles are of questionable necessity, as it's not at all clear that essays about their gay-iconicity actually need to exist independently of their popularity among gay people being mentioned in their biographical articles, but that's a matter for AFD or merge discussions rather than CFD.) So there just isn't a ton of encyclopedic value here, if redirects and articles of questionable value account for literally all but one of its entries. And even if it were to be kept, it would still have to be renamed to "LGBT icons" anyway, since categories like this are named in the plural rather than the singular. Bearcat (talk) 07:00, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The "X as gay icon" articles aren't new, and already existed at the time of the prior discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:47, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I stand corrected. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:27, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Wikipedians interested in Chicago Bears

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. MER-C 16:30, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Grammar consistency. NASCARfan0548 ↗ 04:38, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Eastern Catholic Righteous Among the Nations

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:NARROWCAT)
The Righteous Among the Nations is an Israeli award for those who risked their lives to save Jewish people from the Holocaust and is defining for the recipients, so there's no WP:OCAWARD issue here. Also, these monks were motivated by religion so there's not a WP:OCEGRS, per se. But I'm not convinced that practicing the Byzantine Rite versus the Latin Rite led them to resist Nazism and this creates a narrow category with just 2 articles. We group together a variety of Protestant denominations under Category:Protestant Righteous Among the Nations and 1 Catholic category here should also be sufficient. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:59, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Moreover the comparison with the Protestant tree is even a bit unjust in the sense that Eastern Catholics are a member of the Catholic Church, while one global Protestant Church does not exist. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:58, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose In some cases a Greek Catholic identity, as opposed to Latin Catholic, was linked to rescue. This includes Pavel Peter Gojdič specifically. See this PhD thesis, for some examples.[3] She notes that different denominations behaved differently towards Jews seeking help and that in Slovakia, "The number of those baptized in the Greek Catholic rite was also relatively high (886)." Baptism was, in that country, a mechanism of saving Jews from deportation. (t · c) buidhe 09:31, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the current category only has 2 articles, it cannot be giving readers the impression of widespread Greek Catholic resistance but hopefully the RATN article count will grow! - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:02, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since a large majority of Catholics are Latin Rite, it's hard to infer too much about dmographics from biography article counts in Wikipedia categories. RevelationDirect (talk) 15:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Greek Catholic identity is strong, and in the cases mentioned above played a role in the actions of the Righteous. The reason why there are plenty of latin-rite Catholics (a.k.a. Roman Catholics) in the parent is that they form a very large majority of Catholics, and a subcategory is often not necessary for the majority group (as in male heads of government etc.). Place Clichy (talk) 17:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Greek Catholic ≠ Roman Catholic. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Righteous Among the Nations from Vienna

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCLOCATION)
The Righteous Among the Nations is an Israeli award for those who risked their lives to save Jewish people from the Holocaust and is defining for the recipients, so there's no WP:OCAWARD issue here. We've broken down the winners by country but this is the only city subcategory. While this is not a small cat, the Austrian category is not so large it needs diffusion and I don't think the city category is meaningful or helpful to navigation on this topic. If there is something unique about the Holocaust in Vienna that justifies treating it differently, by all means enlighten me and I'll withdraw this nomination. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:59, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fictional robotic martial artists

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete, merging content to Category:Fictional martial artists and Category:Fictional robots. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:ARBITRARYCAT, since martial arts and robots have absolutely nothing to do with each other. One can be a member of Category:Fictional martial artists and Category:Fictional androids but it doesn't merit a cross-categorization. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:29, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Anthropomorphic martial artists

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:ARBITRARYCAT, since martial arts and anthropomorphism have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Most of the articles in this category are also not defined as martial artists in reliable sources, or aren't characters, so I'd suggest deleting rather than merging it. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:15, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Starman films

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 December 5#Category:Starman films

Category:Dragons in video games

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. MER-C 16:30, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEF, games must be about the topic, not just contain it ZXCVBNM (TALK) 00:30, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Pre-Confederation Canadian expatriates in the United Kingdom

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I understand the point of this category, but pre-Confederation Canadian people were British subjects. I wonder if such a person can be an "expatriate" in the United Kingdom. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:15, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_November_26&oldid=993159322"